Payrise and maintenance

[Lillo7]

Keen to hear people's opinions about this.

Two DC, father is married with more children. Mother is single.

Father is not on a great wage however his wife has received several payrises in the years they've been together and works in a professional career which means as a whole their household is quite well off and can afford quite a lot of luxuries.

Maintenance is paid by the father based on his low wage. Mother is struggling a little as also on a lower wage.

Mother argues that they should pay more as a household instead due to wife's higher pay, obviously not officially through CMS as they don't take new partners into account, but morally. Wife disagrees and says what she earns is nothing to do with the mother and is for her household/children/ stepchildren when there, not at their mums.

Father stuck in the middle a bit.

Random poll options

YABU - wife should subsidise higher maintenance.

YANBU - Mother and father should care for their children on their own respective wages and what wife earns is nothing to do with the mother.

Not the wife's problem

Definitely not the wife’s problem.

Hahahahaha. No.

Not the wife's problem but father and mother should both step up to increase their earnings to provide better for their children. As a parent I would feel very uncomfortable if I had a better standard of living than my kids because I happened to be married to someone well off.

Agree not the wife’s problem.
only way I might feel differently about it is if the dad was working part time or not maximising his earnings to look after new wife’s kids or joint kids, or because new wife earns so much he doesn’t have to worry about it. I think that would be galling for the mother of his first children.

I am the wife in the same situation and whilst I'm happy to help out with the occasional school uniform expense, maybe a contribution towards school trips if I have the spare money at the time I will not be contributing to DSS child support because I already pay more than my fair share of the bills, and have my own children to pay for. Plus he is not my financial responsibility.

Bad enough my DHs ex expects me to leave my house solely to their son when we have 5 children between us (none together).

The word entitled springs to mind.

Why does the ex know how much second wife earns?!

But YANBU, ex is not entitled to second wife’s money.

Why does she expect this?

Is your will watertight?

His wife's income has nothing to do with maintenance. It's entitled of the ex to think she has a claim on it.

This, not the wife's problem but the dad should not be happy to see his kids have a worse life than his own

She doesn't exactly, but she does see them going away a lot, buying nice cars, living in a bigger house etc.. and when questioned is told its wife's income/she's recently received payrise.

Think it's probably fairly obvious I'm the wife.

This all happened because we bought new cars, me and DH, and she questioned it and was told it was me and I'd had a payrise recently (why DH felt the need to mention it I don't know). Since then she's been trying to guilt DH into paying more maintenance because "we" can clearly afford it.

The maintenance DH pays now is based on having DC 2 days a week less than she does and is slightly more than the calculator as it is.

I've said to DH, it's not up to me to subsidise her because she's single and doesn't earn as much.

Our wills are water tight (I'm a financial adviser - I made sure). We own the property as tenants in common. Leaving a specific percentage of our share to our own children with the survivor to remain in the property until death. She told us that we should leave our home to DSS because he may never be able to work and may need somewhere to live with no rent/mortgage as he has aspergers/adhd. He is a bright kid, who, with some encouragement, will fly.

She cannot provide for him because she's not worked properly for 25 years, so has nothing to offer him.

I was very pissed off when she said it, and it has really put me off her but we are very different people.

I feel your pain.

I don't know about your situation but my husband had to give up his career to ensure he can have the agreed contact with his son. He didn't reduce child support, but is earning 50% less. His ex works 7.5 hours per week.

I feel like if she wants to give DSS extra then she should work more or DH should do overtime but I'm fucked if I'm going to work more than the 60 hour week to provide more for DSS. If he lived with us, different story.

Your probably already subsidising your husbands lower income by paying more into the joint pot/ funding the holidays etc. The ex thinking you should also subsidise her is ridiculous. Its just embarrassing that women like the ex even think this way.

Nice try OP. This is clearly about you and your ex-partner’s new partner has absolutely no financial responsibility towards your kids. I get mad every time I read these sorts of threads as my husband’s ex tried this on me, even after calling me names. I took great pleasure in telling her to do one.

FWIW I’m a mum and a step mum and my ex never paid anything. I never asked for anything from his numerous partners either.

No, you shouldn't pay for his kids, but he's really not a great Dad for being comfortable with having a better standard of living than his own children.

It's between the father and mother of the child. Otho g to do with any respective partners income

The thing I see happen quite often though is it appeals to the husband to stop progressing his career/work part time to keep maintenance low while his wife works hard to ensure they have a nice.lifestyle. So the mother then does miss out.

(Personally I am the mother in this situation and don't want to be dependent on him anyway, but not everyone has that luxury)

Whilst I agree with the setiment families are not black and white. If my DH and his ex had stayed together their DS would have been worse off because his ex wouldn't have gone back to work and DH would have been paying for everything and living hand to mouth. Now his ex and DS don't live hand to mouth, but they don't live to our standard because I work in a different industry and am able to earn substantially more. I'd be doing that regardless of my marital and step mum status. I also can't afford to substitute her lifestyle to match ours.

Your husband’s ex will just need to feel grateful that her children get the benefit of the lifestyle you can provide when they’re with their father.

The father is only stuck in the middle if he foolishly continues to engage in this nonsense.
"My wife is not obliged to hand any part of her wage to you. The end."
There's literally not a discussion to be had.

This is a ridiculous argument.

if the parents were together, the SC would just live in a lower income household. They should both be grateful that the OP is able to provide more in her household.

The kids have the same lifestyle when they are with us. I don't think we need to ensure their home with mum also matches. That's her responsibility.

There’s no responsibility.

But I’m a step parent. It would kill my husband to provide a better lifestyle for only half of his children. We would change our contribution in these circumstances, if he really really really couldn’t lift his income.

On a low income he would not have had more children.

I agree with the general feel of the thread, it's not the wife's problem. If you don't earn enough, rather than come across jealous (as this thread makes you) and demand more hand outs, up-skill and get a better job, that is your responsibility and if you can't be arsed you will stay on the same pay. The wife owes you nothing, legally or otherwise.